Northern Ireland Assembly
Monday 18 September 2000 (continued)
2.45 pm
They would have further noted that the Ramaphosa/ Ahtisaari team indicated they would continue to make regular reports on this issue, and they would look forward to further reports occurring. In the absence of such reports there would be a serious problem with regard to confidence on this matter. However, the Member ignores the very simple fact that we know there is a bottom line. I have already demonstrated that the Ulster Unionist Party will stick to that bottom line. I do not want to have to repeat that demonstration, but those parties who ought to be proceeding with decommissioning should not be in any doubt as to our determination.
Mr McClarty:
Does the First Minister find the DUP's position with regard to decommissioning puzzling? Does he agree that since the DUP is working all the structures of this Assembly, it is in fact acting like a half-pregnant woman - someone who says she is a bit pregnant, but not totally. Similarly, does he agree that the DUP is enjoying the luxuries of Assembly positions while decommissioning has yet to take place? Is its position therefore not totally contradictory and confusing to the people of Northern Ireland?
Mr Speaker:
Order. The purpose of Question Time is to provide an opportunity to put questions and seek out information from the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and other Ministers. I will try, on behalf of the Assembly, to resist attempts to turn it into something different.
The First Minister:
As I said in my reply to the original supplementary, there is, as far as the Ulster Unionist Party is concerned, a bottom line which we stuck to. The truth of the matter with regard to the DUP is that there is no bottom line at all. It will participate in Government irrespective of decommissioning. It has made it clear that it will hold on to its seats in Government irrespective of what happens. If that is not the case, let it say so, and let it deal with the statement made by the Member for East Belfast, who said "the priority is not to get decommissioning." That is the DUP position. The priority is not to get decommissioning. Let it face that.
Mr McMenamin:
As we come to consider normalisation, does the First Minister agree that a potential peace dividend arises if the Ministry of Defence sites can be returned to civil use? Will he encourage the Secretary of State -
Mr Speaker:
Order. I have to rule that the question is not in order. It is a supplementary well wide of the original questions. We must move to the next question.
Civic Forum
3.
Mr Close
asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if a statement on progress towards establishing the Civic Forum will be made.
The Deputy First Minister:
We remain confident that the target date for establishing the Civic Forum in early October will be met. A number of matters remain to be resolved, but the First Minister and I hope to be in a position to make a statement on 25 September setting out the latest state of play regarding the first meeting, the venue for the first meeting, the chairmanship and the nominations for the Civic Forum.
Mr Close:
Can the Deputy First Minister advise the House what particular problems have been encountered in the establishment of the Forum? Can we look forward to its establishment and see that fairness and equality in the appointments have been its hallmark?
The Deputy First Minister:
I am not in a position to specify the problems the various organisations may have had to face. That is a matter for them. It is not a matter we would be privy to. I am confident that the standards we notified to the consortia in terms of selection criteria have been adhered to.
I look forward to joining the First Minister in reporting to the Assembly soon on the various factors I mentioned, including personnel. There have been representations from various sectors on their specific interests. These sectors have included the unemployed, the homeless, those dealing with poverty, young people, students, members of minority religions, those dealing with sexual orientation and health professionals. We asked all the consortia to deal with each matter raised in the representations and with other issues. I hope we will find that this has happened when we make the final assessment.
Mr Savage:
Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the agriculture industry is going to be inadequately represented on the Civic Forum? Will consideration be given to increasing membership from the rural community?
The Deputy First Minister:
I can think of no other sector that needs to be represented as adequately as the agriculture sector. We should wait and see what happens with all the nominations. The Assembly resolved to allocate three places to agriculture and fisheries representatives. Those figures will be re-examined in 12 months' time when we review all the workings of the Forum. I am not suggesting that we, collectively, got it exactly right when we adopted the motion moved by the First Minister and myself. We got it fairly right, but if time shows that there is a deficiency, we will correct it.
Mr Speaker:
Will Members refrain from asking questions to the First Minister or the Deputy First Minister. Questions should be directed to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and not to one or other of them.
Mr Poots:
Can the First and Deputy First Ministers confirm that a selection list for the 18 community representatives has already been drawn up, that that list is biased against the Unionist community, and that representatives of the gay and lesbian community have been given equal status to those representing older people, youth and women? Can they also confirm that the Irish language has been included on this list while Ulster-Scots and the Unionist and Orange culture have been given no such position? That situation can only be remedied when Mr Trimble nominates his people.
The Deputy First Minister:
The selection for the consortia was an onerous task, and we did not turn it into a trawl of the various prejudices, as the Member seems to be doing. That would have created a series of grievances and prejudices rather than the new, different dynamic in the political life of Northern Ireland that we should have. The Assembly agreed the criteria, the numbers and how the Civic Forum would proceed. We are trying to implement this now, and I would refrain from any further comment about nominations until we have the definitive list in front of us, which will be very soon.
Mr A Maginness:
Will the First and the Deputy First Ministers ensure that young people, such a vital sector in our society, and the disadvantaged, who are normally voiceless, are adequately represented in the Civic Forum?
The Deputy First Minister:
The First Minister and I agree that if the Civic Forum functions properly it will be a place where people whose voices are not normally able to be heard will be heard loudly and to constructive effect. It is essential that we have young people in that Forum.
It is essential that we get their dimension on the new future that we are trying to build, and they have more of a stake in the new future than we have. In terms of the disadvantaged - the unemployed, the homeless and those dealing with poverty - it is essential that they are present. Those voices have to be heard, and we have to ensure that they are able to make their views known.
Mr Speaker:
Members have made rather heavy weather of the questions. We have only reached number three. We should move on to the next question.
Women's Centres
4.
Mrs E Bell
asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if a statement on the current funding of women's centres in Northern Ireland will be made.
The First Minister:
Funding for the range of project work undertaken by women's centres comes from a wide variety of sources both public and private but mainly from European Union programmes, health and social services trusts, the Training and Employment Agency, the National Lottery, charitable trusts and private sector sponsorship. Current public sector funding includes £60,000 European social fund assistance to support IT training for women, £37,000 from the European social fund and £5,000 from the European regional development fund for Belfast Women's Training Services employment link project. In addition to this, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety provides grants to support specific projects amounting to a total of almost £800,000.
The responsibility of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is for policy development in relation to women's issues. In 1998 the women's support network commissioned research on the women's centres. The research was funded by the Equality Commission. The report has been produced but has not yet been approved by the Equality Commission and the group managing the research. A meeting with the junior Ministers in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has been arranged for Tuesday 19 September 2000. It should be noted that, at this time, no provision exists for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to fund women's centres.
Mrs E Bell:
I thank the First Minister for his comprehensive answer. I am aware that it is not the direct responsibility of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister but wish to make the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister aware that, in spite of the moneys just listed, the future of many women's groups, including those well established, is now in grave jeopardy because of the present difficulties with European funding. Many well-established groups have been turned down by the National Lottery, and I ask that that be discussed at the meeting with the women's support network.
The First Minister:
I am sure that the matters to which the Member has referred will be discussed at those meetings, and we shall look forward to whatever developments flow from that. I appreciate the point that she makes with regard to gap funding, but she will recall that, when we announced the agenda for Government earlier this year, £2 million was made available to bridge gaps in European Union funding for some voluntary bodies between programmes. The funders, including central Government Departments, have prioritised the applications for gap funding. There are a total of 924 applications, including some from women's centres, and the applicants are presently being notified of the outcome.
Ms Lewsley:
I welcome the emergency funding for women's groups administered by the Department for Social Development. Will the Minister tell this House what is being done to maintain women's centre services, which are a valuable asset to the communities? Further, will the First Minister offer assurance that there will be gender equality when it comes to seriously addressing the gender issue in the Northern Ireland Civil Service?
The First Minister:
In relation to the first point, there is some provision for gap funding. It is unlikely to be adequate for all of the applications that will be made, but we are conscious of the issues.
With regard to gender, in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister a gender policy unit was established in July to take forward cross-departmental policy and strategy development relating to gender equality. The new unit will act as a liaison point with the extensive network of non- governmental organisations in this area, especially with women's groups. It will also contribute expertise on equality in relation to gender, sexual orientation, dependants and marital status, and provide advice and guidance to Departments with regard to monitoring their policies for equality in those areas, and will encourage and monitor the development of projects sponsored for European structural fund support.
With regard to the Northern Ireland Civil Service, as of January 1999 the overall gender breakdown was 52% male and 48% female. For a variety of reasons, many of them historical, there is still significant female under-representation in senior grades.
3.00 pm
Electronic Delivery
of Government Services
5.
Mr Ford
asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what progress their Department is making towards reaching the UK Government target of delivering 25% of Government services electronically by October 2002.
The First Minister:
We have stated our support for electronic service delivery and for setting meaningful and challenging targets for the Northern Ireland Departments. We have therefore committed Northern Ireland Departments to the principles of electronic government that underline the Prime Minister's targets for electronic delivery of service. In October 1997 the Prime Minister set a target
"that by 2002, 25% of all dealings with Government are to be done by a member of the public electronically, through their telephone, TV or computer."
Analysis in Northern Ireland last year, based, as in the rest of the United Kingdom, on a selection of services, indicated that we would significantly exceed that target. In March 2000 the target was changed, the emphasis now being that 25% of all key services should be capable of being delivered by 2002, increasing to 100% in 2005. "Key services" are defined as those which result in a high number of transactions with citizens, provide high-value services to citizens or businesses or oblige the citizen or business to transact with the public sector - for example, the payment of road tax. As with other devolved Administrations, we are reviewing key services to ensure that our targets are appropriate to Northern Ireland. In consultation with the Departments who will deliver these services, we shall prepare revised targets and develop a monitoring regime for agreement by the Executive in the autumn.
Mr Ford:
I thank the First Minister for that helpful and positive answer. He said we were ahead of the field by being ahead of the initial 25% target. Can he name any areas where Northern Ireland has been able to run a pilot scheme, or proposes to do so, which might be an example for the slower people on the other side of the water?
The First Minister:
I must apologise to the Member, but I am not in a position to give an answer. I shall look into the matter and write to him if there is such a pilot scheme or there might potentially be one. I should like to add to my statement on achieving the targets that the spread of what one might term electronic and computer literacy in the community as a whole is important. Northern Ireland is below the UK average. There is something to be done by the wider community in that respect.
Mrs Carson:
Can the Ministers see any role or devise any plans for the delivery of electronic services through rural post offices, something which would be of advantage to the rural community?
The First Minister:
One of the advantages we have in Northern Ireland is the very extensive and high- quality communications network. With the development of broad band technology we would be in a position to provide services of that nature throughout the rural community. As to the specific point on post offices, that is a matter which we may want to take up again.
Mr Speaker:
Members may wonder why I have allowed proceedings to continue until shortly after three o'clock. There was a point of order from Mr Dodds. When such points are raised, they do not eat into the time. The clock is stopped in that sense, even though the real clock continues. However, the time is now up for questions to the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and we now move on.
Mr Shannon:
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Deputy First Minsiter continues to refer to the North of Ireland. Historically and geographically -
Mr Speaker:
Order. That is not a point of order, as the Member knows perfectly well. However, I earlier mentioned the point of order that questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister are to both, not to one of them. I have ruled on that point of order in this sitting.
Mr Shannon:
This is the Northern Ireland Assembly, not the North of Ireland Assembly.
Regional Development
Mr Speaker:
Order. We move on to questions to the Minister for Regional Development. I must inform Members that Question 1 to the Minister for Regional Development, standing in the name of Mr McGrady, should have been directed to the Minister of the Environment. That question will now receive a written answer from that Department.
Similarly, Oral Question 8, again to the Minister for Regional Development, standing in the name of Mr Edwin Poots, should have been directed to the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. That question will now receive a written answer from that Department.
Mr McGrady:
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am not disputing your ruling, as I am not unduly concerned by it. I would like to point out that planning in its entirety, covering the whole of the south-east of Ulster, to which that question relates, is definitely a regional problem and must be answered in the context of regional planning. Therefore I am puzzled as to why it should be transferred for answer by another Department. Secondly, it would have been courteous of that Department to have advised us that they were transferred questions.
Mr Speaker:
I will take up the second point to ensure that this kind of difficulty or embarrassment does not arise again. On the matter of the allocation by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister of the responsibilities of the Departments, that is well outside my remit. We must simply abide by the rules.
(Madam Deputy Speaker [Ms Morrice] in the Chair)
Painting of Department Property
2.
Mr A Maginness
asked the Minister for Regional Development if he will consider the introduction of measures to prohibit the painting of kerbstones and the road fixtures which are the property of the Department with partisan or sectarian colours.
The Minister for Regional Development (Mr Campbell): The Member for North Belfast will be aware that I do not condone any unauthorised use of the Department's property. He will also be aware that the problem of graffiti, including the painting of kerbstones and road fixtures, is prevalent throughout Northern Ireland. Measures were introduced to prohibit such painting. It is an offence, under the Roads (Northern Ireland) Order 1993, for any person without lawful authority, to paint on public roads, kerbstones or other road fixtures. Prohibition of painting on public properties, whether they be roads, kerbstones or other property belonging to the Department is not a problem that my Department alone can resolve. It will require a general consensus and strong local support. The Roads Service will, however, remove graffiti or sectarian symbols erected illegally on its property that are a danger to road users. Where there is no danger we will seek to remove such material on the advice of the RUC and where there is strong local support. To act without local support is likely to lead to a proliferation of such material and put at risk the safety of staff tasked with the removal work. There is also the question of cost.
Mr A Maginness:
I agree with the Minister that it is not simply a matter for his Department; it is a general problem facing the community. The laissez-faire attitude adopted by the Department, which is represented in his answer, simply allows the reinforcement of sectarian attitudes and the concept of sectarian territoriality in our society. It continues the rather offensive practice of painting kerbs, which is off-putting to potential investors, particularly in urban areas, and leads to greater problems for the various communities.
The Minister said that local communities should in some way give their consent. Is the Minister in a position to investigate how local communities could be effectively and properly consulted? This would allow them to give their opinion on this rather primitive and sectarian practice of daubing pavements, not just in urban areas but also throughout Northern Ireland.
Mr Campbell:
First of all, I will reiterate the attitude of my Department, and it is not a laissez-faire attitude: any illegal painting of kerbstones and road fixtures should to be removed where possible. The Member has had some previous correspondence on this with my Department, and they have described to him how measures have already been put in place to remove some of the graffiti he refers to.
How local communities might come together to try to further this cause is something that will have a much wider remit than that of the Department for Regional Development. My Department has a functional responsibility to remove the graffiti, on advice from the RUC, where it is a hazard to road users, bearing in mind the safety of the staff tasked to carry that out. How we get local communities to come together to agree on the necessity of having it removed is a matter of much wider concern.
Mrs E Bell:
Can the Minister update me on the promise made by an earlier Minister to review the budget for the removal of such painting from, for example, kerbstones? Has consideration been given to the issue of community safety and to consulting with the community and statutory agencies?
Mr Campbell:
I do not have up-to-date information regarding the budget, but I will write to the hon Member for North Down about it and the issue of community participation.
Fortwilliam-Knocknagoney Connection
3.
Dr McDonnell:
asked the Minister for Regional Development if he will consider the erection of a bridge to provide access from Fortwilliam to Knocknagoney at the Victoria Channel in Belfast.
Mr Campbell:
A bridge over the Victoria Channel, or a tunnel under it, and all the associated connecting roads would cost several hundred million pounds. These funds are not available to my Department's Roads Service. Although a bridge or tunnel would have time savings for traffic on the M2 bound for Bangor and North Down, and vice versa, such a scheme would not have a positive cost benefit. It could not be justified when compared to the need for higher priority schemes across Northern Ireland. The need for such a scheme has, to some extent, been obviated by the construction in recent years of the Lagan Bridge, which links the M1 and M2 with the Sydenham bypass by way of the M3.
Dr McDonnell:
I thank the Minister for his answer, but I would be a little concerned that officials may have provided him with rather scanty research information. Is he aware that some 3,000 acres of underused land - land with vast economic potential - lie between the city of Belfast and the sea? Approximately 2,000 of those 3,000 acres are in the possession of the Port of Belfast and were the subject of the ad hoc Committee inquiry some months ago. Is the Minister aware that there are a further 1,000 acres that could be used for development? Does he not agree that it is essential for the prosperity of Greater Belfast that this land be opened up? Perhaps it could be developed along similar lines to the Foyle Bridge in his native city or the toll bridge in Dublin - or to a number of other examples in places along the east coast of the United States of America.
Does the Minister agree that such a bridge would not be solely for travel from one place to another, but that it would help to open up that area, giving people sight of those 3,000 acres of land and access to them? I am aware of, and perhaps agree with the Minister on, the amount of money that might be involved. However, I disagree with him on the benefits involved. I believe that the benefits would outweigh the cost. Does the Minister not agree that a feasibility study would be beneficial in this case, with the emphasis on the opening up of the land as much as on the transport use?
Mr Campbell:
I agree with Dr McDonnell on the issue of the underutilisation of the 3,000 acres. However, dealing with the specific issue of the construction of a bridge, the design and construction of such a bridge would be very difficult given the need to maintain shipping headroom in the Victoria Channel before descending to road level at Airport Road West. A large span suspension bridge might be possible.
The presence of the adjacent Belfast City Airport would impose additional strength requirements on the bridge piers, however, to cover the risk of aircraft collision. There would be massive difficulties, not least of which are the several hundred million pounds that is unavailable in my present budget.
3.15 pm
Mr Leslie:
Has the Minister considered setting up a ferry in the area of the port? If so, can he reassure the House that he would seek to have such a ferry built by Harland and Wolff, rather than award the contract to Liverpool - as he did with the Strangford Ferry?
Mr Campbell:
The specific question that was posed related to a bridge from Fortwilliam to Knocknagoney - we have not considered the possibility of a ferry. I will deal with the issue of awarding the contract for the ferry at Strangford. The Roads Service budget for the replacement ferry was set at £3 million. Tenders were invited and the lowest tender was within this budget price at £2·6 million. It was well within the target. Harland and Wolff also tendered for the contract, but its tender price was considerably in excess of the budget. EU guidelines are quite specific on value for money. I had no alternative but to award the contract to the Merseyside firm. This is good news for Strangford and Portaferry and should be welcomed by people there.
Madam Deputy Speaker:
Ministers are normally loathe to respond to questions which are considered wide of the mark, but if Ministers do answer those questions, they can leave themselves open to for further questions of that type.
Mr McNamee:
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas Cheann Comhairle. Has the Minister's Department given consideration to the construction of a bridge at Narrow Water Point, which would link Warrenpoint in County Down with the Carlingford Peninsula?
Madam Deputy Speaker:
That question is ruled out of order. It is a separate issue.
Water Service Contracts
4.
Mr Hay
asked the Minister for Regional Development how much of the work originally carried out by the Water Service in-house is now contracted out to the private sector.
Mr Campbell:
With reference to its operational activities, the Water Service has been implementing a wide range of efficiency plans and programmes for over 10 years. These are essential to ensure that the Water Service continues to deliver an efficient operational service within its budget. Programmes have included market testing of a range of functions, which has resulted in some work being contracted out and some retained in-house through successful bids. This mixed economy allows comparison between in-house and contracted-out activities. Historically, private sector contractors have been engaged to support in-house operations in a range of activities. The main activities that were originally carried out in-house and have moved to the private sector include most of the grounds maintenance, building maintenance, road reinstatement, painting and decorating, and reservoir cleaning. A significant proportion of sludge tankering, sewer maintenance, street furniture repairs, service pipe repairs and water quality sample collection is also undertaken in selected areas.
Over the past three years the Water Service has paid contractors approximately £10 million per annum for services previously carried out in-house. Over the same period approximately £100 million per annum was spent on operational activities as a whole.
Mr Hay:
There are serious concerns among the workforce of the Water Service about the number of services that are being contracted out. I think that the list is longer than the one given. Can the Minister supply a total breakdown of all the work that has been contracted out by all divisions of the Water Service?
Does the Minister agree that continually contracting out Water Service work will have a serious effect on jobs in the Water Service? There is serious concern about this. How many employees were in the Water Service five years ago, and how many are there today? A considerable number of employees of the Water Service are no longer there, and that is a worry to the whole workforce.
Mr Campbell:
I assure the Member that I will respond in writing about the breakdown of work contracted out by division, and that will give him a clear picture. The Water Service has been engaged in recent years, particularly during the past ten years, in efficiency plans and programs that have included market testing of a range of functions. This has resulted in a similar exercise to that being undertaken by local government.
Mr Close:
The Minister is obviously working hard to ensure that the privatisation of the Water Service takes place. I am rather surprised by that. Can he tell the House how much more privatisation by stealth he anticipates while he is Minister?
Mr Campbell:
I realise that Mr Close is asking specific questions, but at no time have I referred, either today or on any previous occasion, to the possibility of privatisation of the Water Service. In fact, my predecessor on a number of occasions specifically precluded the possibility of its privatisation. It is not on the agenda; I have not hinted at it; I have not suggested it; and it is not taking place.
Ms Ramsey:
Can the Minister tell us, on the issue of the private sector, if any of the work at the Lagmore conduit, that is currently at the centre of the cryptosporidium bug problem, was carried out by the private sector?
Madam Deputy Speaker:
That question is wide of the mark, and I rule it out of order.
Mr Hussey:
I totally agree with Mr Hay's remarks about the staff in the Water Service. In his answer to Mr Hay, the Minister referred to one of the contracted-out items as being reservoir cleaning. In view of many public concerns about water quality and safety, would that not be better handled in-house and then the Department would have much greater control.
Mr Campbell:
I thank the Member for his query. Over a number of years the Water Service has adopted an efficiency strategy. I agree with him that there have been concerns about water quality, although the issue now is about how we can best achieve the good quality water that people demand and ought to have. There is no evidence to suggest that the Water Service has departed from that in anything it has done in recent years, but I do note his comments.
Mrs Nelis:
In light of what he has said today, can the Minister state categorically that contracting out has not produced efficiency and accountability in the Water Service and that it has not impacted on the increasing reports of the leaching of raw sewage into the water system?
Mr Campbell:
I cannot confirm the comments made. As I have said repeatedly, the Water Service has embarked on efficiency plans and programmes, and it has done that year-on-year in line with similar work being carried out by local government in an effort to get best value.
Regional Strategy
5.
Mr McFarland
asked the Minister for Regional Development when the regional strategy will be published.
Mr Campbell:
I can confirm that my Department is currently drawing together a draft text of the final regional development strategy taking account of the public examination report and the subsequent comments by the Assembly, Departments and other interested parties.
Where appropriate, discussions are taking place with other Departments about key sections which impact upon them. This will take a few more weeks. Further consultation with the Regional Development Committee will be required.
The regional development strategy will be a critically important and over-arching document which, when adopted, will set out a framework within which the region can develop over the next 25 years. It will have implications for all parts of Government and the private sector. The aim, therefore, is to complete the political process for approval of the final regional development strategy before the Christmas recess in order to achieve publication in early 2001.
Mr McFarland:
I thank the Minister for his answer. There are strong indications that the level of awareness among other Departments of the implications of the regional strategy is somewhat limited. Some plans have been published but little notice is being taken of them. If the regional strategy is to be a success all Departments need to be involved with it. What steps is the Minister going to take to ensure that all Departments are signed up and will comply with the regional strategy?
Mr Campbell:
The Member will be aware that we are required by law to take that into account. In a few weeks' time we hope to be in a position to finalise the document and bring it before the Regional Development Committee. It should be ready for publication immediately after Christmas recess.
Mr Dallat:
Will the Minister assure the House that the strategy will be of the highest quality, and that communication in the Minister's Department and between the Department and others, will ensure that the strategy will not suffer serious defects? Can he assure us that we will not have another incident which could provide a storyline for an episode of Ballykissangel - where there are no sheep on the mountain and cardboard ones are made?
Mr Campbell:
I assure Mr Dallat that a series of consultations were undertaken. They were significant and substantial across Northern Ireland, in local government and with the Regional Development Committee. Regarding quality, the strategy will be brought before the House and I look forward to the extensive support that no doubt will exist then.
Mr McNamee:
A LeasCheann Comhairle. In considering the regional strategy, can the Minister assure the Assembly that he has given due consideration to the imbalance in the allocation of resources in areas west of the Bann and in border counties? Can he assure us that the Regional Strategy will reflect that consideration?
Mr Campbell:
I reiterate what I said regarding the consultation - every local district borough council was consulted, east and west of the Bann, north and south of Northern Ireland. Every one of them was comprehensively and systematically consulted.
Cryptosporidium
7.
Mr Byrne
asked the Minister for Regional Development what measures have been taken to ensure the highest possible standard of domestic water supply following the recent outbreak of cryptosporidium in Belfast and Lisburn.
11.
Mr Close
asked the Minister for Regional Development if he will make a statement on the recent outbreak of the cryptosporidium bug in water in parts of Greater Belfast.
Mr Campbell:
Madam Deputy Speaker, with your permission I will take questions 7 and 11 together.
I made a comprehensive statement to the Assembly on 11 September 2000 regarding the cryptosporidium outbreak in the Lisburn and south west Lisburn area. In my statement, I detailed the work that was taking place in investigating possible sources of contamination and in securing the system from any further problems.
3.30 pm
I am pleased to be able to report that a meeting of the outbreak control team held today reviewed the latest results of water samples taken from the Lagmore conduit. They are satisfied that the danger has now passed. Work has recently been completed on bypassing part of the Lagmore conduit, where it is believed the water was contaminated, and clean water is now flowing into the Poleglass reservoir and other reservoirs in the area. This has been a worrying incident for people in the area affected, and I regret that many people became ill. In accordance with established procedures, the outbreak control team will be providing a detailed report on the incident. The Water Service will be working closely with the consultant for communicable disease control and other members of the team in doing this. Water supplies are now back to normal, and everyone in the area affected can be assured that tap water is safe to drink and for all-purpose use.
Mr Byrne:
I thank the Minister for his statement. However, the public want assurance from him that Water Service officials are going to be asked to examine all pipes and reservoirs to try to minimise the potential for any outbreak of cryptosporidium again. It is very important that the public are reassured that, if there is a breakage in a pipe by a private developer or contractor, it will be immediately examined so that we do not have a problem later.
Mr Campbell:
I thank the Member for his question, but may I remind him that in Northern Ireland we have 15,000 miles of pipes and a systematic examination of every inch or millimetre is very difficult. I ask the hon Member and the House to bear all of these queries in mind when it comes to the allocation of budget, when it comes to resources that require to be made available in terms of the Water Service. The underfunding that has existed for 30 years has, in part, led to some of the difficulties we are now facing. I expect and hope to get the support for the necessary funds to ensure that we are not faced with any outbreak of a similar nature again.
Mr Close:
Recent information seems to throw doubt on the part of the Minister's statement which pointed to a particular house and the break in the sewage pipe in Lisburn. If the break into the sewage pipe by a private dwelling was subsequently shown not to have been the cause and the members of that household were not suffering from cryptosporidosis, what, in the Minister's opinion, was the most likely cause of the outbreak?
Mr Campbell:
I assume that Mr Close is referring to a statement made by an environmental health officer of Lisburn Borough Council. The Eastern Board confirmed on Tuesday 12 September that a septic tank remained under consideration as a possible source of a recent outbreak of cryptosporidium in the south-west Belfast and Lisburn areas. This followed a meeting that afternoon of the multi-agency outbreak control team. The team agreed that a septic tank remained as a possible source which merited ongoing investigation.
Mr Davis:
I know that the Minister is assisting the Eastern Health and Social Services Board in this matter. With regard to restoring a clean water supply, he has confirmed this afternoon that everything in that particular area seems to be going well. Can he confirm that in June 2000 there was algal toxic poisoning suspected in cattle from the Lough Island Reavey water treatment works? Did a problem in the water treatment works plant produce an illegal discharge through the canal leading to the river in which the cattle were drinking? Has the Eastern Health and Social Services Board been made aware of this by the Water Service?
Mr Campbell:
I hear what Mr Davis says, although I am unaware of the specific nature of this. Last Monday, when he brought a specific matter to my attention I assured him that I would respond to him in writing. I will do likewise with this one.
Madam Deputy Speaker:
The time is up.
The Environment
Planning
(Human-Rights Law)
1.
Mr Poots
asked the Minister of the Environment if he is satisfied that the current system of planning and appeals in his Department will meet the requirements of the proposed new human-rights legislation.
The Minister of the Environment (Mr Foster):
My Department has been examining the current system of planning and appeals in Northern Ireland in the context of human rights legislation and believes that current arrangements will meet the requirements of that legislation. This, of course, is an evolving area, and in consultation with relevant Departments throughout the United Kingdom, I will continue to keep procedures and policy under review.
Mr Poots:
Is the Minister aware that a case has already been taken against the Scottish Executive under the human rights legislation, and that that case was lost by the Scottish Executive? The situation in Northern Ireland is that the Planning Service can overrule the decisions of the Planning Appeals Commission. Does he believe that in that situation, human rights legislation will rule against this Administration as it did against the Scottish Administration?
Mr Foster:
I am aware of the current interest in human rights and the possible implications for the planning process. We will be keeping related policies under review. I must emphasise, again, that my Department, in consultation with its legal advisors and with relevant Departments in Great Britain, has examined its key processes and procedures. My Department is generally satisfied that current procedures will meet the European Convention on Human Rights requirements.
Planning:
Mobile Telecommunications Masts
2.
Mr McGrady
asked the Minister of the Environment if he will make a statement on the planning implications of mobile telecommunications masts, in view of recommendations contained in the Stewart Report published in May 2000.
Mr Foster:
I am conscious that planning arrangements for mobile phone masts are a matter of public concern. I am very much aware of it in my own part of the country. I am minded to require full planning permission for all mobile phone masts. However, before coming to a final decision, I wish to consult relevant interests and propose to do so by way of a consultation paper to be issued before the end of October.
Mr McGrady:
I thank the Minister for his reply. The Minister has indicated that the Stewart Report will be published, presumably in a short while. Would he be of a mind to take the main recommendation of that report, which says that in the case of
"All base stations, including those with masts under 15 metres, permitted development rights should be revoked and withdrawn and that the siting of all new base stations should be subject to full planning permission"?
Is he also aware that the Stewart report indicates a total criticism of the lack of protocol in how planning applications are handled, and that changes are urgently required in the planning process? Will he have the departmental personnel and expertise to carry out these recommendations?
Mr Foster:
This is a difficult area. It concerns many people. In March 1999 the National Radiological Protection Board was asked to set up an independent expert working group to assess the current state of research into possible health risks from mobile phones. I want to emphasise that all mobile telecommunications masts are subject to planning control. Masts over 15 metres in height require my Department's express planning permission under the Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991. Most telecommunication masts under 15 metres are permitted development under the Planning and General Development (Northern Ireland) Order 1993. My Department's prior approval is required only on location and design
Under the prior approval procedure my Department has 42 days within which to issue a decision on applications for ground-based masts, and 28 days for all other types of telecommunications equipment. I cannot say that I will be withdrawing any already granted approval, to answer Mr McGrady. The consultation paper will be issued before the end of October and will include a draft planning policy statement setting out the Department's proposed policies for telecommunications development. The difficulty, and this applies to all Members is that many of us carry mobile phones around with us. If we were not getting good communications there would be a real hullabaloo. I take the point that there are great fears in the community about health risks.
Mr Shannon:
The Minister has indicated that consultation will start in October. How long will this consultation process take and when does he hope to bring a report back to the Assembly? Also, will the concerns of local people be taken into account? What part will they play in the consultation process in relation to planning applications being granted? In the past, many people objected to applications but they still went ahead.
Mr Foster:
The Northern Ireland consultation will include a draft planning policy statement, and this will take a little time to develop. I can see it happening early in the new year. The Northern Ireland consultation will include a draft planning policy statement, and this has inevitably taken some time to develop. However, this should assist the consultation. Applicants for planning permission to erect telecommunications masts are entitled to have my Department make a determination. It would not be proper to postpone this decision-making process pending the development of planning policy in this area. I want to emphasise again that we are very concerned with it, but it does not all come under the Planning Service. There are health issues involved as well. So there are a couple of Departments involved in this.
Mr Close:
This issue is one which greatly concerns many people and, as the Minister has already said, there are health implications. Therefore I find it rather sad that there is a dismissive attitude, that we cannot do this, that and the other thing, while people's health is being put at risk. I say that as one who does not and will not carry a mobile phone. Does the Minister not agree that the ease with which these mobile telecommunications masts get planning permission, particularly under the prior approval procedures, has led to a proliferation of the masts throughout Northern Ireland, and that this in turn is creating radiation smog which is endangering the health of the entire community? What is he, as Minister, going to do to ensure that the voice of the people is listened to in their strong objections to such a proliferation of these masts? Is he further aware that, even when a council unanimously objects to the planning permission being granted for such masts, the Department goes ahead willy-nilly and grants permission over the head of the people and its elected representatives? Surely he would agree with me that this is no way in which such a serious issue should be dealt with.
Mr Foster:
I take exception to the fact that we do things willy-nilly. That is entirely wrong. My Department performs its work professionally in a dedicated fashion, and we take cognisance of representations made to us. We are not taking this lightly - I have got to make that point. As I said earlier, in answer to Mr McGrady, health issues are the responsibility of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Advice provided by that Department is that in areas readily accessible to the public there is no convincing evidence of a causal link between health risk and exposure to electromagnetic fields associated with mobile telecommunications masts. Any further advice or guidelines will be fully taken into account by the Planning Service. We do not - I repeat: do not - take this lightly. It is a difficult issue, and we understand that. We do take cognisance of the complaints made by people and the fears which people have.
3.45 pm
Mr Hussey:
The Minister referred to electromagnetic radiation and thermal radiation. From the Stewart report we can see that there is also great concern about the long-term effects of non-thermal radiation. Stewart talks about the precautionary approach being exercised with regard to telecommunication masts. Will that form the basis of the Department's approach until proper consultation is carried out?
Mr Foster:
Of course, it will warrant a precautionary approach and great thought. I must emphasise this. We do not take this lightly. All matters are taken into consideration. We know there are fears, but nothing in the Stewart report confirms anything absolute at all, we have to take that into consideration. This issue is not being taken lightly. We are looking at it in depth, and all aspects will be taken into consideration during the assessment procedure.
Rural Planning
3.
Mr Dallat
asked the Minister of the Environment if he agrees that opportunities to develop an intergovernmental approach to rural planning must be encouraged, and if he will encourage a holistic approach to planning issues so that rural generation has the support and encouragement of all relevant Departments, agencies and cross-border bodies.
Mr Foster:
Many strands of Government have a role to play in rural planning and regeneration, and a holistic approach is certainly to be encouraged. I can assure the Member of my support for such an approach to planning and cross-cutting issues.
Mr Dallat:
I welcome the Minister's assurance. Coming from a rural area, he understands better than many the particular problems of the rural community and how the planning laws, as they are presently interpreted, impact on the rights of people. The most basic right of any individual after the right to life is the right to shelter. At the moment, families on low incomes are finding it exceptionally difficult to bid for those sites that are available.
The Minister has acknowledged the difficulty in obtaining planning permission in rural areas and how this threatens the lives of rural schools, churches and shops. It in no way helps the regeneration of rural communities. I welcome the Minister's statement. I do hope that he exercises control over all his Department so that this very serious issue is addressed in the future.
Mr Foster:
Coming from a rural area, I am well aware of the problems in the countryside, and Mr Dallat made mention of those. It is important that Departments work together on this. I also endorse the concept of a living and working countryside as set out in the draft regional strategic framework and agree that we should seek to promote a strong mixed-use rural economy. For example, in 1999-2000, 86% of applications for new houses in the countryside were approved. This represents more than 4,000 new dwellings in the countryside.
However, we have to be very careful that there is a good balance, that we marry one with the other. We do not want the countryside spoilt. I know that there are issues concerning rural areas and the people feel very strongly about them. These are taken into consideration in our planning policy.
Mr Paisley Jnr:
Is the Minister considering any measures that would relax the stringent and at times oppressive planning controls in the countryside, especially when farmers are seeking planning permission for additional rural dwellings? Will he assure the House that he will examine ways to relax such stringent control?
Mr Foster:
There is provision at this time for extra houses in rural areas so long as they are not within an area of special control or a green-belt. In those cases special circumstances must prevail for permission to be granted. This has been referred to as a cross-cutting issue, and I must emphasise the responsibilities here of both the Department for Regional Development and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, which is responsible for general rural development. The Department for Regional Development will be responsible for preparing a planning policy statement on the countryside. My Department will contribute appropriately to the development of these policies. We will work in conjunction with them.
Mr Hussey:
As regards rural regeneration, the Department of Agriculture and Rural development, through its Area Based Strategy Action Groups, is encouraging farmers to diversify. These farmers find themselves coming up against the planners, who are putting difficulties in the way of their efforts at rural regeneration. I support what Mr Paisley Jnr has said with regard to housing, but will the Minister give us an answer with regard to actual regeneration in the business sense?
Mr Foster:
As I have said, my Department will contribute appropriately to the development of these policies, along with the two Departments referred to earlier. It is likely to be parties such as the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, rather than the Planning Service, that would initiate rural regeneration projects, including those involving agricultural diversification, but success can depend on a holistic approach being taken by a number of public and private-sector interests. The Planning Service is generally confined to a facilitating role within the confines of rural planning policy. As a local councillor, I have every sympathy with the farming community in many aspects; but we adhere to policies. We do facilitate, but only where it is the proper locating and design of a development. We will help where we can, but we have to adhere to the policies that already exist.
Mr ONeill:
The Minister expressed sympathy for the rural community and planning in the rural community, and yet he is almost satisfied with the statistics put out by the planning department for the number of permissions given. Some rural areas in Northern Ireland are dealt with more severely than others, and my view is that those statistics shield that. Does the Minister agree that centralist Department strategists have an urban mindset which militates against the rural dweller being able to live, work and rear his children in areas of special control and outstanding natural beauty? These classifications make it fairly difficult for farmers to look after their families properly in those areas. Does the Minister agree that what we all need to do is to inject more of the rural thinking into the Department's decision-making?
Mr Foster:
I thank the Member for his statement. I am not so sure what the question was. I am fully aware of the difficulties, and I sympathise with them, but we have to work as far as we possibly can within policy. The rural planning strategy also contains policy statements which aim to facilitate economic development and diversification in the rural economy, particularly in agriculture. There still is, within the policy, room for a retirement bungalow to be built on farmland. Sometimes one gets the impression that we are stifling every development. I know how difficult it is. I have stood at site meetings in the countryside, and I have questioned various decisions. However, I also take into consideration that people are adhering to planning policy. We do try to facilitate building where it is suitable, appropriate, and does not despoil the countryside.